asts--did not in this instance occur.

It has always seemed to me of the utmost importance that in all
criticism of vivisection our facts should be absolutely reliable, and
that whenever inaccuracies occur, they should be corrected. All that
we want is the truth, without concealment of abuse on the one hand, or
misstatement on the other. In this case, I am especially glad to make
correction. For many years I have been acquainted with the writings
of Dr. Berdoe, and I have never found therein the slightest
overstatement or exaggeration of any kind. In the twenty-one years I
have written in advocacy of some measure of reform in regard to
vivisection, this, too, IS THE FIRST INSTANCE IN WHICH AN INACCURACY
OF ANY STATEMENT OF MINE REGARDING ANY EXPERIMENT HAS BEEN POINTED
OUT.
ALBERT LEFFINGWELL.

BROOKLYN,
May 31, 1901.

[1] No advocate of unrestricted experimentation, so far as known, has
ever dared to print the full details of this Goltz experiment.

In the only essay to which Professor Bowditch has called attention,
the statement had been corrected; the fact that an allusion of five or
six words in an earlier essay gave an erroneous suggestion, was quite
overlooked. But Dr. Keen will have it that there was a "REVISED"
edition, and that in this "A DESCRIPTION OF THIS SAME OPERATION" was
given.

There are here two misstatements. There is not the slightest reason
for calling it a "revised" edition. Was there a "description given"?
Let us quote the entire passage, written nearly a quarter of a century
ago, in order to see what Dr. Keen ventured to call a "description of
this same operation."

"We are almost at the beginning of the twentieth century.
Civilization is about to enter a new era, with new problems to solve,
new dangers to confront, new hopes to realize. It is useless to deny
the increasing ascendancy of that spirit, which in regard to the
problems of the Universe, affirms nothing, denies nothing, but
continues its search for solution; it is equally useless to shut our
eyes to the influence of this spirit upon those beliefs which for many
ages have anchored human conduct to ethical ideals. Regret would be
futile; and here, perhaps is no occasion for regret. To the new
spirit, which perhaps is to dominate the future, this longing for
truth, not for what she gives us in the profit that the ledgers
reckon, but for what she is herself--this high ambit